When Charlie Kirk was shot, another piece was added to the puzzle.
What do I mean by that?
I’m sure that somewhere along the way you have “worked” a jigsaw puzzle in someone else’s home. That is to say, you’ve noticed and then stood over a card table filled with little cut out pieces of cardboard and stared at it. Perhaps part of the puzzle has been solved, but maybe not. On the table or nearby is the box cover with the picture of what the solved puzzle will look like.
A place on the cover picture catches your eye. You glance at the table, looking for the piece that matches. You pick one up and hold it by its edges and look back at the table. Maybe you try to put it in its proper place, and maybe you succeed. If you’re like me, either success or failure can keep you going.
But I won’t stand there long. It’s not my house and, unless I’m invited to help, it is not my puzzle to solve.
On the other hand, the world is my house. Because I live here, the puzzle of humanity is mine to help solve. Yours, too, but the pen is currently in my hand, so I’ll start.
An age old question
From time immemorial, as the saying goes, people have asked: “What’s wrong with the world?”
Allow me a moment philosophical to note that anyone who asks that question is saying, “All is not right with the world,” because the question about what’s wrong is generally rhetorical. A rhetorical question is one that is asked in order to make a statement, or perhaps to create an emotional effect. No real answer is expected. (In just a minute, we’ll give one anyway.)
OK, I’m off the philosophy bus and back to the jigsaw puzzle. Thanks for following along!
Many times I’ve witnessed people who were trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle say, “There is a piece missing.” I’ve said it myself, I’m sure, but what if, instead of too few pieces, there were extra pieces? The jigsaw puzzle called “The World” is like that. New pieces show up. The assassination of Charlie Kirk is one of those, and perhaps has made the puzzle a little more complicated.
Or has it?
In reality, an act of this nature doesn’t complicate the puzzle, it actually makes the picture more clear. If I have to walk to the market to get milk for the baby and it looks like it might rain, I have to decide whether or not to carry an umbrella. If it is raining, the umbrella is coming along.
Nothing says it’s raining like the terrible act of violence visited on Mr. Kirk as he sat in a chair and focused on answering a question.
Good and evil
This event has become a watershed moment for many. There are calls to action from various viewpoints. Some have suggested more violence, or at least they’ve said that violence is an acceptable tool in this kind of ideological battle.
No, it is not. Violence like this is evil, which is the opposite of good.
It was the same with the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. That was an evil act, although John Wilkes Booth believed he was doing a good thing for the South.
And, in fact, it was the same with the murder of Jesus Christ. Those who had him killed — primarily the Pharisees — were convicted by the message that Jesus shared openly and freely. He answered their questions until they finally understood there was no question he couldn’t answer in a way that was obviously true but that they didn’t like.
They feared losing their authority, their control, their traditions, and perhaps even their identity. So they took the spokesperson (Jesus) and had him killed.
The prophet Isaiah wrote these words perhaps 700 years before Christ, and almost 3,000 years before now:
Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.
Truth
One important piece of the puzzle is that, for some time now, people from Oprah to GenZers have talked about “their truth.” What they really mean to say is “their opinion.” Using the word truth, though, gives their opinion more gravitas. It also makes others wrong, as it did Charlie Kirk for the alleged shooter.
We must have an objective standard for good and evil, and we do: God gave it to us. But even nations without God have a standard of good and evil. Without a moral standard, more and more people will fall prey to those who say you can define your own truth.
So I’ll say that part of what is wrong with the world is that the standard for good and evil is not discussed or not practiced. We have allowed, and in some cases even encouraged, the normalization of evil. We’ve done that often in the name of individual rights and individual freedoms. Both of those are good, until individuals insist on their rights and freedoms at the expense of everyone else. In some instances that has shown up as character assassination. In this case it went further.
There is another “Woe” that follows the one quoted above. It says simply:
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
Perhaps a hundred years ago, as the story goes — and it may be apocryphal — a newspaper sent a letter to many prominent people asking them to give their opinion on the question “What is wrong with the world?”
One answer came from the author and defender of Christianity G. K. Chesterton. He wrote, “Dear Sirs, I am. Sincerely yours, G. K. Chesterton.”
In a sense he was right. We must all stand up for good and stand against evil. We can do that in our homes, we can do it in our jobs, and we can do it in our thoughts. When we do, the world will get better.
Do good. It’s in you.
Trying to make sense of the world…
When Charlie Kirk was shot, another piece was added to the puzzle.
What do I mean by that?
I’m sure that somewhere along the way you have “worked” a jigsaw puzzle in someone else’s home. That is to say, you’ve noticed and then stood over a card table filled with little cut out pieces of cardboard and stared at it. Perhaps part of the puzzle has been solved, but maybe not. On the table or nearby is the box cover with the picture of what the solved puzzle will look like.
A place on the cover picture catches your eye. You glance at the table, looking for the piece that matches. You pick one up and hold it by its edges and look back at the table. Maybe you try to put it in its proper place, and maybe you succeed. If you’re like me, either success or failure can keep you going.
But I won’t stand there long. It’s not my house and, unless I’m invited to help, it is not my puzzle to solve.
On the other hand, the world is my house. Because I live here, the puzzle of humanity is mine to help solve. Yours, too, but the pen is currently in my hand, so I’ll start.
An age old question
From time immemorial, as the saying goes, people have asked: “What’s wrong with the world?”
Allow me a moment philosophical to note that anyone who asks that question is saying, “All is not right with the world,” because the question about what’s wrong is generally rhetorical. A rhetorical question is one that is asked in order to make a statement, or perhaps to create an emotional effect. No real answer is expected. (In just a minute, we’ll give one anyway.)
OK, I’m off the philosophy bus and back to the jigsaw puzzle. Thanks for following along!
Many times I’ve witnessed people who were trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle say, “There is a piece missing.” I’ve said it myself, I’m sure, but what if, instead of too few pieces, there were extra pieces? The jigsaw puzzle called “The World” is like that. New pieces show up. The assassination of Charlie Kirk is one of those, and perhaps has made the puzzle a little more complicated.
Or has it?
In reality, an act of this nature doesn’t complicate the puzzle, it actually makes the picture more clear. If I have to walk to the market to get milk for the baby and it looks like it might rain, I have to decide whether or not to carry an umbrella. If it is raining, the umbrella is coming along.
Nothing says it’s raining like the terrible act of violence visited on Mr. Kirk as he sat in a chair and focused on answering a question.
Good and evil
This event has become a watershed moment for many. There are calls to action from various viewpoints. Some have suggested more violence, or at least they’ve said that violence is an acceptable tool in this kind of ideological battle.
No, it is not. Violence like this is evil, which is the opposite of good.
It was the same with the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. That was an evil act, although John Wilkes Booth believed he was doing a good thing for the South.
And, in fact, it was the same with the murder of Jesus Christ. Those who had him killed — primarily the Pharisees — were convicted by the message that Jesus shared openly and freely. He answered their questions until they finally understood there was no question he couldn’t answer in a way that was obviously true but that they didn’t like.
They feared losing their authority, their control, their traditions, and perhaps even their identity. So they took the spokesperson (Jesus) and had him killed.
The prophet Isaiah wrote these words perhaps 700 years before Christ, and almost 3,000 years before now:
Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.
Truth
One important piece of the puzzle is that, for some time now, people from Oprah to GenZers have talked about “their truth.” What they really mean to say is “their opinion.” Using the word truth, though, gives their opinion more gravitas. It also makes others wrong, as it did Charlie Kirk for the alleged shooter.
We must have an objective standard for good and evil, and we do: God gave it to us. But even nations without God have a standard of good and evil. Without a moral standard, more and more people will fall prey to those who say you can define your own truth.
So I’ll say that part of what is wrong with the world is that the standard for good and evil is not discussed or not practiced. We have allowed, and in some cases even encouraged, the normalization of evil. We’ve done that often in the name of individual rights and individual freedoms. Both of those are good, until individuals insist on their rights and freedoms at the expense of everyone else. In some instances that has shown up as character assassination. In this case it went further.
There is another “Woe” that follows the one quoted above. It says simply:
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
Perhaps a hundred years ago, as the story goes — and it may be apocryphal — a newspaper sent a letter to many prominent people asking them to give their opinion on the question “What is wrong with the world?”
One answer came from the author and defender of Christianity G. K. Chesterton. He wrote, “Dear Sirs, I am. Sincerely yours, G. K. Chesterton.”
In a sense he was right. We must all stand up for good and stand against evil. We can do that in our homes, we can do it in our jobs, and we can do it in our thoughts. When we do, the world will get better.
Do good. It’s in you.
Get The Do Good U news
We won’t send you spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Let's Do Some Good
Learn more about our programs.